The Grenada gazette., 1887-09-10

Lei
4 d sesm - IlguB1ne - Yapog 1hao -
Both wrong snA Useless.
The subject Of summer following 10
always new. hut, after all, one can SEQ
that it is going out Of method. But
the question is. have we improved upon
it in a general way? We now have
what We style rotation Of crops, aud
If the land does not get foul. we say
that we do not need to summer fallow.
Possibly not, but "what's the use' OF
summer following light sandy land
aud letting it bake. and dry cut in the
hot. blazing sun? Such land needs to
be shaded. and it would be far better
to plow it up in the spring. SOW on
sixty pounds Of millet seed and got .
dense growth. and then when it was
about a foot high. turn it under and let
it get thoroughly rottcd by the time
wheat was ready to drill. Such .
course would be great benefit to clay
land. and better than our usual method
Of following. which is to plow the field
and then abandon it until needed for
wheat.
II land is left for months after pl0w-
ing. it would seem that the ''baking" 1t
gets. would do more damage than
good. If it were frequently narrowed
and the surface kept mellow, there
would be something like soil mulch
to protect it. In q wet year.
there would he q great loss Of organic
| matter which would be saved il the
ground was kept shaded in some way.
If left the weed crop would do more
harm than good. As general rule I
believe that land is more benefited by
crop of growing clover. than by .
summer fallow. The only benefit I
can see for summer fallow, is when
land can not be got into crop in the
spring. and weeds and the like promise
big crop Then 1t would be best to
plow and fallow it. Such land, if oc-
casionally gone over with SPRING
tooth harrow during the summer, will
mellow up and make good wheat land.
which might otherwise not be the case.
A friend the other day was telling
me about the cost of crop Of grain,
and he charged up the interest on the
land. taxes, team work, his own labor,
and twenty loads of manure per acre
at fifty cents per load, and the crop
came out even. 'Then," said l, 'you
did not have any thing left to pay
debts WITH "Ycs, had one hun
dred dollars" said he. ,1A-"'
I'can't see how" l repliod, ''if you
figure correctly!" He tried to make
it plain. but finally said: 'It's all nom
sense to charge up that way against
crop, and pay imaginary expenses
After the hired man is paid, the
thrcshers, and the phosphate, the rest
is profit, and that is my compensa.
ton" There was the truth in his re-
marks. Where man owns his land,
what sense is there in charging up in
terest on land, his own labor that Of
his teams, ETC., apart the crop2 To
whom does he pay it? The man who
charges interest on his land against
his crops, forgets to credit 1865 for
house rent and barn privileges
to his farm, or 81 to the team each
time he goes to the village--livery
rates. TO be sure he pays 20
cents per acre taxes on his farm. But
look at the donation the farm makes
him in return? What difference does
it make about the income Of the dairy,
whether the owner charges it with 35
cents per week for pasture; and $l2
per ton for hay, both farm products?
To whom does he pay it? What is
bought, is chargeable; because it is
an outgo. but all homegrown prod
ucts. interest, team work. homemade
fertilizers. ETC., not paid for, it is idle
to meddle with in figuring. What
farmer pays out in money is charge
able against the farm or crop; but all
else is only TO make M exhibition
paper-that has no reality in the sense
Of the word; simply putting money
into another pocket in the same pants.
--.,no. NcEfroN IN Ohio Farmsr